I guess I'd agree with the first part of that. Although in my opinion they are also a stepping stone to more sustainable technologies. Given that there is a large amount of technology reuse with BEVs and fuel cell vehicles I wouldn't call hybrids a distraction.

If anything is a distraction I'd have to say its hydrogen and bio-fuels

Rob

Yup and the earth is a stop gap location for human habitation till we get off the earth or until the sun explodes.

I'm not counting on the french for any innovation to get us off us gas. What are they going to make, a nuclear powered car?

Some more:

So this article convincingly proves it. The "experts" and "researchers" can be idiots.

I think it was one of the old guard right here on priuschat, who early
on put it "half a pack a day is still smoking".
.
_H*

Exactly. Here are my thoughts on that section.

How is the popular nature and benefits hindering the fuel cell from being viable in 2025. It seems the infastructure issues of hydrogen fuel cells are much more costly than hybrids, since even the recent government funding for batteries is a drop in the bucket to what a hydrogen infrastructure would cost. Not to mention that battery technology can also be used in hybrids.

The unbolded and bolded portion seem to be contradicting each others as it first says viable hydrogen fuel cells, then states they won't be viable until at least 2025 and has drawbacks. So what do the experts suggest we do waiting for 2025 to arrive? In 17 years who knows how hybrids will have change and improved? It wasn't that long ago that hybrids were getting slammed by automakers and car media alike, yet hybrids are not the big bad wolf holding down fuel cells? Could it be the reason why no one else besides the hydrogen lobby is marketing them is because most realize how far away hydrogen would be and it's many drawbacks?

As far as the overall message, it would indeed be sad if we have the same hybrids now as we do in 2025. I think many/most/maybe all vehicles are likely to be hybrid by 2025, just not the same type of hybrid we have today.

We should all do like the French and drive diesels I guess.

And while it is in the interest of Toyota and other manufacturers to find more efficient batteries for storing energy that a fuel cell (which I personally believe is crap) might store excess allowing the cell to run constantly at even output which I thought would be advantageous.

Also lighter more efficient electric motors would suit both a hybrid and a fuel cell cars.

http://priuschat.com/forums/prius-hybrid-news/30183-isn-t-hydrogen-fuel-cells-just-bunch-bs.html

Old debate. Same conclusions.

Hi All,

What is bizarre about this report is the ONLY way a fuel cell prime mover is EVER going to be economic in a personal vehicle is as implemented in a hybrid car. The hybridization reduces the peak power required from the fuel cell and thus the amount of rare, and/or expensive catalytic materials needed.

So rather than being a road-block to fuel cell implementation, hybrid technology is making it much more likely that we will have fuel cell technology in the future. If that means the industry has to put more money into hybrid cars now, well, yea, otherwise the fuel cell will NEVER happen. Until the car companies are up to speed with hybrid electric vehicles, the jump to a fuel cell car will never be able to happen.

It's all hype anyway. Just last summer, the GM people were smug as heck calling the Toyota hybrid technology "obsolete" compared to their's. But then what they supported turned out to be too expensive and impractical for anything but really large vehicles. It's not clean either.

Solutions which give the impression of being good on paper does always play out that way during implementation.

Of course, what the heck would you call a traditional vehicle? Talking about outdated technology!
.

The internal combustion engine has been a 'STOPGAP' as the history of alternative power solutions have been 'researched' from the beginning of the automobile.

I specifically remember when I was in high school watching the news talk about fuel cells and cars. I remember because I thought that it was cool that the news reporter put his face in front of the exhaust pipe and breathed in the exhaust, proclaiming that "Look! it's water!" That was 1988. Little did I know that that bit I saw was to be replayed over and over again throughout the years as a way to quell the environmentalists whenever they started to stir a little.

Two things come to mind, and sum up these poor 'tools' .. writing for Canadian Driver:

1) Go to their home page, & what do you find? An EV1 article, where these idiots talk about "EV1 buyers" because the poor slobs aparently don't know GM REFUSED to EVER sell even one. Then, if any doubt remains, they state that it was "unpopular" with buyers. REALLY? How many of them didn't ever get leased out? much less, snapped up . . . even though they made it as hard to to as an act of congress, just to get one leased? (and then, you have to ignore the waiting list comprised of THOUSANDS) ZERO, you say? (shaking head)

2) Canadian Drives also states, "The researchers point out that most manufacturers are rapidly integrating hybrid electric vehicles into their technology portfolio, despite the absence of significant profitably."
What researchers? Wouldn't it be fun to see how Canadian Driver arrives at that conclusion? GM, with their pants down, because they pooh pooh'ed hybrids for nearly 10 years, (now having poor profits, and gettng knocked off the "Largest-Manufacturer" status to Toyota) ... and the Largest manufacturer of hybrids, Toyota, making over a Million hybrids ... becoming more and more profitable (tho they DON'T sell nearly the amount of Land-Boats that GM does) ... that data base, I gotta see.

Wow, talk about loosing any credability ...

Yeah. I don't really like the word 'stop-gap'. It has a negative feel and probably negative connotations if not negative denotations.

I know a world full of hybrids forever is not a solution.

I consider my car more of a 'bridge', if you will. One of many 'bridges' that we will use until have clean, renewable energy sources.

I think this is an often overlooked point. I personally was shocked to find that every single GM alt fuel vehicle has Tier 2 Bin 5 emissions!

http://www.gm.com/explore/fuel_economy/altfuel/vehicles/overview/pdf/gm_afv_08_fuelHighlights.pdf

Just for kicks, here's another emissions flyoff:

2008 Chevy Malibu Hybrid vs. 2007 Toyota Camry Hybrid
CO2 (g/mi): 325.48 vs. 258.47 (25.9% higher) Greenhouse/Global Warming Gas
CO (g/mi): 0.6 vs. 0 (inf higher) Poison / Toxic
NOx (g/mi): 0.05 vs. 0.01 (400% or 5X higher) Smog / Acid Rain
NMOG (g/mi): 0.037 vs. 0.006 (517% or 6.2X higher) Formaldehyde & other VOCs, irritant, cancer

GMs hybrids almost make diesels look appealing Oh wait, maybe thats the idea

Rob

The study should be named Dust to Dust Part II

This paper also deserves to be distributed far and wide...especially to those decision makers that are touting H2...

Sad thing is people fall for this type of ad all the time.